A Canberra woman has been refused bail, accused of being involved in an incident where a man was held against his will and injured during an alleged attempt to enforce a debt.
Sharon Ann Stott, 57, appeared in the ACT Supreme Court on Friday, via audio-visual link from the Alexander Maconochie Centre.
Prosecutor Keegan Lee told the court Stott was charged with forcible confinement, intentionally inflicting actual bodily harm, making a demand with menace, and attempting to detain a person to gain an advantage.
Stott's barrister, Steven Whybrow, said she had pleaded not guilty and would stand trial.
Mr Lee told the court all four charges related to an alleged attempt by Stott to enforce a debt, with the help of a co-offender, at the home of an associate in Kambah on January 10 last year.
The prosecutor opposed bail, saying Stott had "a well-established network of criminal associates, who, in the police view, do her bidding".
He made reference to Stott's criminal history, including her involvement in a January 2019 aggravated robbery in Oaks Estate. Stott spent the last year behind bars on remand for that offence before receiving a sentence on Thursday that suspended the remainder of her 19-month jail term.
Mr Lee said the Oaks Estate aggravated robbery, in which Stott enlisted the help of four men to retrieve a gun from a former friend, was one example of Scott's proven history of using others to achieve her objectives.
"When she wants something she is willing, and has the associates to use, to get what she wants," Mr Lee said.
He said the prosecution believed bail should be denied in respect of the alleged Kambah offences because if it was granted, there were concerns Stott would again use others to commit offences, including the possible intimidation or "standing over" of witnesses.
But Mr Whybrow argued that if granted bail, Stott was "on very strong notice" that her trial was coming up, and that "anything she says or does may be the subject of surveillance by the police".
He said Stott's trial was not expected to begin until May, meaning she faced months on remand if she was kept in custody.
Mr Whybrow said there was a presumption in favour of bail, and that the court could impose conditions that would allay prosecution concerns. These included regulating where Stott was allowed to go in her home suburb of Kambah in order to prevent her crossing paths with the alleged victim, who also lived there.
Mr Whybrow said the prosecution case was "not overwhelming" and that the defence would argue that Stott had stayed outside the Kambah home where the incident is alleged to have taken place, and that she had called the police and waited for them to arrive.
Mr Lee, however, replied Stott had only stayed there because her car was at the scene and could not be driven away, meaning she would have been linked to the scene in any event.
He said the allegations included that gloves and cable ties were found in the car.
Justice Chrissa Loukas-Karlsson said Mr Whybrow had "put everything that could possibly be put" on behalf of his client, but she refused to grant Stott bail.
The case is scheduled to return to court for a pre-trial callover on February 24, when Stott's trial is expected to be set down for May.
